This user loves History. This user is interested in the history of England. This user is interested in the history of the English Civil Wars. This user is interested in the French Revolution. This user is interested in the Napoleonic era. This user is interested in Central European history. This user is interested in the life and times of Frederick the Great. This user ardently supports Liberal Democracy throughout the world. This user prefers parliamentary systems of government.

Just a little geek of history and politics, with a specific niche interest in how the design of electoral systems, governance, the internal operations of political parties, and issues of political representation impact each other and the course of histsory.

As a Wikipedian, I prefer making small number of substantive, sometimes lengthy (or bundle of multiple list items), relatively extensive edits over a series of small edits when I update an article, mainly because I have an aversion of cluttering up the edit history.

Large submission does not mean large-language models use. It just means effort was made in consolidating contribution into multiple paragraphs into multiple sections. No one should assume otherwise. I do not use AI for any of my contributions. The fact that I need to state this irritates me.

I am generally pretty good with folks critiquing specific point or statement or portion of my contribution whether on quality, objectivity, or relevance of content. I may or may not agree with those criticism, but any disagreement can be resolved through reasoned exchange. I am even less precious about my writing style. My writing has be criticized for being too wordy, too much rhetorical flare and too little grammatic care, too esoteric or too pretentious, taking too long to get to the point, too many run-on sentences with too many disparate points, too many tangential tidbits that crowd out the point, etc etc. I am often guilty of these and I would readily accept such criticism as good-faith reminders to improve.

My writing style sounding too much like robots is not a criticism that I would accept without proof or further explanation. To folks who feel an entitlement to revert lengthy, extensive, substantive edits with a terse/casual allegation of AI without making any effort in justifying such action, let me clearly state that your assessment in relation to my writing style was incorrect, baseless, and entirely subjective. One way or the other, no one should feel they are entitled to make such subjective assessment without making the slightest effort in explaining their rationale or how they came to such assessment. Otherwise, any arbitrary act of censorship can just claim to be reversing AI use.

But I also watch tennis!

This user is a Wikipedian in Canada. This user identifies as queer. This user loves Tennis This user thinks Novak Djokovic is the Greatest tennis player of All Time!